OBJECTIVE: To investigate the validity and reliability of multiple listener judgments of hypernasality and audible nasal emission, in children with repaired cleft palate, using visual analog scaling (VAS) and equal-appearing interval (EAI) scaling. DESIGN: Prospective comparative study of multiple listener ratings of hypernasality and audible nasal emission. SETTING: Multisite institutional. PARTICIPANTS: Five trained and experienced speech-language pathologist listeners from the Americleft Speech Project. MEASURES: Average VAS and EAI ratings of hypernasality and audible nasal emission/turbulence for 12 video-recorded speech samples from the Americleft Speech Project. Intrarater and interrater reliability was computed, as well as linear and polynomial models of best fit. RESULTS: Intrarater and interrater reliability was acceptable for both rating methods; however, reliability was higher for VAS as compared to EAI ratings. When VAS ratings were plotted against EAI ratings, results revealed a stronger curvilinear relationship. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study provide additional evidence that alternate rating methods such as VAS may offer improved validity and reliability over EAI ratings of speech. VAS should be considered a viable method for rating hypernasality and nasal emission in speech in children with repaired cleft palate.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the validity and reliability of multiple listener judgments of hypernasality and audible nasal emission, in children with repaired cleft palate, using visual analog scaling (VAS) and equal-appearing interval (EAI) scaling. DESIGN: Prospective comparative study of multiple listener ratings of hypernasality and audible nasal emission. SETTING: Multisite institutional. PARTICIPANTS: Five trained and experienced speech-language pathologist listeners from the Americleft Speech Project. MEASURES: Average VAS and EAI ratings of hypernasality and audible nasal emission/turbulence for 12 video-recorded speech samples from the Americleft Speech Project. Intrarater and interrater reliability was computed, as well as linear and polynomial models of best fit. RESULTS: Intrarater and interrater reliability was acceptable for both rating methods; however, reliability was higher for VAS as compared to EAI ratings. When VAS ratings were plotted against EAI ratings, results revealed a stronger curvilinear relationship. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study provide additional evidence that alternate rating methods such as VAS may offer improved validity and reliability over EAI ratings of speech. VAS should be considered a viable method for rating hypernasality and nasal emission in speech in children with repaired cleft palate.
Authors: Meredith J Cler; Yu-An S Lien; Maia N Braden; Talia Mittelman; Kerri Downing; Cara E Stepp Journal: J Speech Lang Hear Res Date: 2016-10-01 Impact factor: 2.297
Authors: Vikram C Mathad; Nancy Scherer; Kathy Chapman; Julie M Liss; Visar Berisha Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2021-09-20 Impact factor: 4.756